About your Search

20130706
20130714
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3
at a time of sequestration and a time of deficits, how can we spend more on fossil fuels when we should be spending less? in addition, this bill needlessly increases the funding for weapons activities and defense programs. at a time where we're winding down our involvement in two wars that have been very costly in lives and dollars this last decade, and that's why i'm offering an amendment with representative quigley that would put the v-16 back to the agency's request level that would save taxpayer dollars and reduce the deficit. this bill actually increases funding by over $20 million for these ongoing missile programs. at an era where americans should expect the government to look at where these moneys are invested. there have been growing concern raised by the air force's own blue ribbon review panel about the effectiveness of the b-61 and that's why the price -- the price for this program has continued to rise dramatically and confidence in the missile program has dropped. in fact, some of our nato allies like germany have called for the b-61's to be removed from their boarders. ag
to the deficit? no. instead we are recklessly pushing forward this partisan bill designed to inflict grave harm. and even more pernicious is the substance of this bill which throws millions of american families aside. this removes the entire nutrition title from the farm bill with no indication that the majority intends to take up those programs in the near future. let's be clear about what this means. food stamps are the critical central area of our social safety net. helping over 47 million americans, nearly half of them are children. 99% of recipients live below the poverty line. 75% of households leaving this aid include a child, a senior citizen or an individual with a disability. these are the individuals and republican hat this majority has just called extraneous. they are not extraneous. the bill before us would mean he death now of the food stamp program, the other nutrition programs that have been part of the farm bill for decades. this bill is immoral and it is a serious risk to our society. 532 farm groups sent the speaker a letter opposing the splitting off of nutrition program. bi
for passage. today those of us who came to town to cut spending, reduce the deficit, reduce the size of government, and make reforms have a real opportunity to walk the walk. this farm bill does all of those things. this bill is going to save taxpayers $19.3 billion. it's going to repeal or consolidate more than 100 programs at usda. and it's going to repeal the direct program. something that many of my farmers and ranchers back home are -- do not want to give up. the farm bill also does a couple other things. it is being considered separately on its own merits. as many in this body have called for, and it replaces antiquated permanent law so we don't face things like the dairy cliff tend of the year anymore. the bill before us reforms not just the politics of the farm bill, but the process as well. this farm bill has earned our support and i urge my colleagues to vote yes. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from minnesota is recognized. mr. peterson: i yield two minutes to the distinguished minority whip, the gentleman from maryland, mr.
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3